There are few things our federal government does that are more important than tabulating how the economy is performing. And there are few things it does better.

Yet, reflecting what historian Richard Hofstadter called “the paranoid style in American politics,” few acts of our government are more subject to “suspicious discontent,” in Hofstadter’s words. Many, on both sides of the political divide, are quick to assume the government cooks the books before announcing economic indicators.

That has been particularly evident in recent weeks, both in the reaction to the announced unemployment rate and employment numbers for September and in the particular Consumer Price Index that will be used to adjust Social Security payments for 2013.

Why does any of this matter?

First, it is important that government compile these indicators. It is impossible to make coherent policies in a modern economy without having accurate measurements of just what is going on. Furthermore, such information is vital to managing businesses of all sorts and many nonprofits. Without information on growth trends, price level changes and labor market conditions, it is hard to plan what to produce or how and where to sell it. It is harder to get necessary staff.

Second, if the numbers are important for public and private decision-making, then it is vital that the numbers be accurate and that people trust them. Put out incorrect data or undermine people’s faith in it and you introduce great uncertainty into decision-making. Uncertainty leads to poor decisions and to economic inefficiency. The same use of resources results in fewer goods and services to meet people’s needs and wants.

The economic indicators compiled by both federal and state governments in our country are about as accurate as statisticians and economists can make them, given resource constraints. Economists, whose views range across the political spectrum, accept them as accurate.

When all the scoffing about the September unemployment rate broke out, it was notable that no respected economist, even among those who strongly oppose the Obama administration or who are advisers to presidential challenger Mitt Romney, expressed any such doubts. But there always are many skeptics in the general public who think the White House or Congress can dictate the numbers.

Some knowledge about the processes may be useful. Start with the myriad labor force indicators tabulated monthly. Most come from two key surveys.

The Current Population Survey contacts some 60,000 households to ascertain the employment status of everyone in the household 15 years of age and older. The households are chosen in a “multi-stage stratified sampling” designed to achieve as representative as possible a sampling of the population as a whole. The primary info from this survey is the unemployment rate.

The establishment survey gets data about 141,000 “establishments” representing nearly a half-million workplaces. The word “establishment” is used because it covers for-profit businesses, governments and nonprofits. These generally are the largest employers in the country, and reporting is mandatory.

However, not all establishments are zealous about submitting their numbers by the deadline, and this can cause problems as it did this past summer.

This survey provides information on the number of jobs, hours and earnings. Estimates of the number of people who are self-employed or work in firms too small to be included in the survey are made using statistical techniques based on past relationships.

Both surveys are large efforts involving many people. All are civil servants, not political appointees. Anyone who has had professional contact with these people knows how serious they are. They take pride in what they do. If some political appointee tried to get them to cook the books, there would be myriad calls to Congress and to investigative reporters. And while some of the work is compartmentalized, they know how their data fits into the whole and would publicly reveal any fiddling after their work is passed to the next level.

Furthermore, the data is shared with labor market researchers in each of the 50 states who use the numbers as part of the data to calculate employment numbers and unemployment rates for their state and its cities and counties. Any corruption of the data at the federal level would raise alarms at the state level.

There are elaborate measures to keep preliminary inferences from one survey affecting the analysis of information from the other survey. The two groups don’t talk to each other. And there are also measures to ensure no one who is privy to the information prior to its release can use it for insider trading.

The head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics usually is a political appointee, but she has no direct involvement in compiling the numbers and hears them only when the tabulation is complete.

Right now, the Bureau is headed by a career civil servant, because as in many other cases, Congress has stonewalled confirmation of anyone appointed by the Obama administration.

The tabulation process is accurate and honest, but the numbers are not perfect. There is time pressure, and when there are data glitches, such as large employers failing to submit accurate numbers in a timely manner, it necessitates subsequent corrections. As with any statistical survey, accuracy depends on sample size. The CPS sample was larger at one time, but a funding cut in the first year of the Reagan administration forced a reduction in size. People do not realize it, but a 0.2 percentage point change, as from 8.0 percent to 7.8 percent or 8.2 percent, may represent no real change at all in the underlying rate for the labor force as a whole.

The process and the products are good. Economists trust the integrity of the numbers. It is unfortunate that the general populace does not as well.

St. Paul economist and writer Edward Lotterman writes the "Real World Economics" column for the Pioneer Press.

As you comment, please be respectful of other commenters and other viewpoints. Our goal with article comments is to provide a space for civil, informative and constructive conversations. We reserve the right to remove any comment we deem to be defamatory, rude, insulting to others, hateful, off-topic or reckless to the community. See our full terms of use here.

More in Opinion

RE-READING THE SECOND AMENDMENT In the wake of yet another school shooting carried out by an individual, I re-read the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We are supposed to have a well-regulated militia. If we had one, members would be encouraged to defend liberty and not settle personal grievances by the use of firearms. Erik Westgard, Shoreview RESORTING...

New mayors in both of the Twin Cities have made clear that affordable housing ranks high among priorities for their administrations. But what’s a mayor to do about a problem as big and complex as this one? We asked two nonprofit housing experts — Paul Williams of Minneapolis-based Project for Pride in Living and Deidre Schmidt of St. Paul-based CommonBond...

In the immortal words of the late and great Jimmy Cannon, no one asked me but … The politics of opioid abuse: Don’t get me wrong. This problem is real, tragic and widespread, here and across the nation. Opioids were connected to 42,000 deaths in 2016, according to the Centers for Disease Control. The president and Congress want to throw billions...

Do you remember when Edina was represented at the state Legislature — and Minnesota was represented at the Republican National Convention — by a black attorney? Probably not. John Frank Wheaton, a former shoe shine boy, became the first black man elected to the Minnesota Legislature in 1898, and his aristocratic district included Minneapolis’ Kenwood neighborhood and Edina. Across the...

Passenger rail connects people to places, providing an efficient, relaxing method of travel and an economic benefit to communities along the route. Given its many benefits to individuals and communities, we are very troubled that the Minnesota House and Senate Transportation Committee chairs have stopped the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) from accepting already-allocated federal funds to continue environmental planning for...